we are going to try to get the projecter? no. on the tv, right. >> so so we have just for members of the public who may not have seen these materials as they were walking in we do have copies of the previous presentation, and the documents that commissioner wynns was referred to, it is in a question and answer format, from the discussion primarily from the discussion that the board had in the budget and business services committee last tuesday. so all of that information is available for the community members who are present to avail themselves of. >> so this is just a very, it is not meant to be a recap of all of the discussions that have taken place so far. but just to frame some additional information and some highlights about the big

picture of the state's budget and also, the district budget, right now, where we sit and where we think we might be headed in the near future. and so we want to start with kind of on a syterical note there was an apt cartoon that appeared in the sunday chronicle a couple of sundays ago and it was on two sundays ago in the opinion page and this maybe only a nerd could appreciate this but i thought it was hilarious. so this shows that the governor's education budget is putting a drop of water in a canyon that drop of water encouraging but the top of the

canyon is the 2007 funding level but as we have been saying over and over again, we are digging ourselves out and the state is helping us dig out of a very deep hole that took a while to create and it will be a while before funding problems are solved. so even though directionally, it is really critical, and such a relief to see that the tide is starting to turn in absolute terms we are still at a neater level of funding and so it was sort of validating in a way to see this recognized in the chronicle that way. so that is just one note. the next slide that you have seen before. but just to illustrate the same point, this is what we call the alligator chart. this is an older version of the

slide if you could mark on your copies that the 13, 14, number should actually reflect 5501. and rather than 5292 and so it is increasing a bit more than the version that is on the screen. and so, that is still quite a bit less than what we received in not in inflation adjusted dollars, back in 2007, 2008. so that concept that was illustrated in the cartoon, this was another data point on that general theme. and hopefully, as the lcsf gets implemented and the prop 98 continues to grow, we will cross this blue line and we will start to make progress towards that green line that is the plan. that is the stated intention of the governor and the

legislature in passing the lcsf, but it will take a while to get to the green line, in the meantime, there are as a mentioned last week, it was two weeks ago there are costs and you have heard some of the speakers speak to this as well. the cost increasing also effects the district. and this is just one example that is not meant to be all encompassing by any means but one example of the costs that have increased over the past several years and this is what this chart shows is the district employer contributions to the city retirement system. and i think that i may have mentioned this in one of these prior meetings. and so this, chart actually goes back more than a decade. and if we go back to 2002, 2003, and 2004, the district and this is true of the city and county as well. the employer's side of the ns

pension fund, the city retirement system, this is for our classified civil service workers because of the balance and the fund and the retirement fund, the investment returns that were being gained, the lower pay outs to the retirees, for several years there were zero contributions for the employer side of the pension benefit that started to change of course, the blue line shows the percentage and the orange bars show the amount that were paid each year and as the set of variables changed and the employer contributions started to come in to play, we went from making zero percent of payroll for civil service employees to about four and a half percent on up to 6.6 peene

happened, of course, there are millions of dollars that we had to pay in to the retirement system and this is pretty much dictated to us as an employer within the retirement system and this is not something that we control. and more recently, and in a not helpful twist of timing, since the recession took place, and that previous chart shows that we saw that large decrease in our funding, at the same time we saw the large increases in the payments that we had to make for the city retirement employer contributions so, going from about 5 or 6 percent of employee payroll to into the teens and then more recently, almost 25 percent. so looking ahead to next year, we for many of our employees,

the largest group of our employees in the civil service, we will make employer contributions that are equivalent to 25 percent of payroll. which is 4 percent higher than we paid this year. so you heard some of the public speakers speak about the desire and justifiably so for compensation increases. the amount of these increases is four percent of the same payroll that we will pay into the city retirement system next year compared to the current year and that is 25 percent more than we were paying a decade ago. so just to put it in perspective. there are or have been and will continue to be some significant pressure on the costs and at the same time that we have been trying to make our way through this pretty bleak period in terms of revenues. so again, just as an illustration. but, to segway on to a more

optimistic out look, the next page shows our current multiyear projections, and these are our raw projections and so these do not reflect efforts to curtain the costs or we are not always trying to identify new sources of revenue such as real estate and so these do not reflect these ideas and they do reflect the biggest single of itself and so you see that the revenues are expected to grow substantially going into next year compared to the current year and at the same time we still see some of these phenomena in terms of the expenditures as well but hopefully and we are expecting in 14, 15, and 15, 16 that the revenue growthous paced the expenditure growth and we

become closer to getting rid of that deficit that we have had for a couple of years. this is actually, it may be heard to interpret these numbers but these are much more encouraging than the equivalent numbers that we have shown on the same evening the last few year when we look at the projections over two or three years. it has been sort of horrifying. so the fact that we can see and are beginning to rely on this revenue growth from the lcsf that is of course going to be subject to the state keeping their commitments and the economy recovering as it is expected to do. and prop 98 growing as it is expected to do if all of that stays on track, then we will expect to see the revenue trajectory that is shown here. and you can see that that structural deficit is in that middle of that line revenue is less expenditures and we expect that for next year that that

starts to narrow. and hopefully go away, the following year. so if the last slide just restates some of what commissioner wynns reported out that we do know that there are several juicy topics, this is not an exhausted list but some of the things that came up in the last couple of discussions that the board has had about the budget, that we really are looking forward to supporting your policy discussions and providing lots of inking and details and so these are just a few, the lcsf and the transition and the old of the issues that have been mentioned a few times about the central verses site-based resources and decisions how to make progress towards implementing a 7-period day in the secondary schools and other aspects of the mtsf

that over supercede the central verses the side based question, and on that last note, i do want to point out that the materials that were available that are available do include a lot of details at the site level about the mtsf resources and so that is it for our slide presentation and if the commissioners have questions or additional questions, we are here to respond. >> >> mr. haney >> i have sort of a big picture of the question and one that i think that we have discussed and some of the prior meetings but i think that it will be helpful to hear again. seeing that this is the night that we are going to be voting on the budget. you know, i think that it is great news and it is huge for us and to see an additional $20 million coming in revenue and the unrestricted general fund is exciting and i think with that, you know the public is

going to wonder sort of how we made our decisions around what to prioritize with the funding coming in and what was the philosophy that drove the decisions that were made and with that, sort of what were the major sort of driving factors that make-up that additional $20 million in expenditures. and particularly when i think, you know, we heard tonight that some questions around you know, salary and continued layoffs, and i think folks are going to wonder how we decided to prioritize the funding that came in and what specifically it was used on. so if that is instructed to the superintendent. >> thank you. >> i will take the first and i will ask deputy superintendent to fill in the gaps. i think that the priority work in the priority funding has

already been articulated over a number of months by the board itself in terms of what the board has identified for the district's goals going forward. so we have actually looked at the goals and priet orties that the district has identified through the board. and we have worked very diligently to fund that priority work and that is also encompassed in my evaluation what you are holding me accountable for as well. so it should be no surprise to the public that our professional development, the money and some of it does include some consultant help with developing the capacity with the implementation of the ininclusive model for serving students with a disability is a big part of that you know we are not novices in san francisco around providing support to under served school communities and drastically changing the academic out comes for students. look at the superintendent and the sig schools specifically in

the zone. and what we have done is take the learnings from that work and try to bring that system-wide, which is again the direction that the board has given the staff. we want to take the learning and what has worked well and make that a system wide approach for serving under served communities in the rhetoric and i do appreciate some of the comments that evening, this is become an entity on to itself, the ntsf, what is that? >> taking what we know works and not somewhere else and in san francisco and in our neighborhoods with our kids and with our teachers and with our students and our parents, and we want to take that system wide. so if means that the english

language learners will get additional support and it means that students with disabilities and schools with greater numbers of students with disabilities will get effective and very delineated types of professional development to built the capacity at the school sites it means that we will have a balanced approach to literacy to where we are not going to teach to a text but we will provide a rich literacy environment that requires the materials and it means that we are also going to say that in our particular system, and the board has said that our charge is to close the achievement gap. we know that what happens some have noten effective at closing at the gap. and they have accelerated it. and there is more of a defined

approach where we are a unified school district are not up to choice, you don't have a choice to include the students in the general education classroom as the first placement. but in order to do that. we understand that teachers have not had professional development to understand how to do that. or to necessarily develop the capacity to do that. we understand that the para professionals needed that kind of development support as well. we also realize that leverages the multiple streams of funding for example our peace dollars and prop a dollars and providing infrastructure so that the school sites can meld the funding streams to provide opportunities for teachers to have collaboration time. because we know that that is also a critical component that is shown tremendous effects in our schools and in our superintendent zone and in our under performing schools where they had increases in student achievement. so it is not a simple answer, but it is not a simple issue either, but the priorities that

we have taken in crafting this budget, has been completely through an economickty lens and one of the things that i will say before i punt to superintendent lee for specifics as well. we think in the general sense, we, we feel that it is incredibly disrespectful to the professionals in our school, our para professionals and teachers and principals to say that we want you to do a better job at educating children that have needs, whether they are english language learners or students with disabilities or homeless students or students learn ng poverty. and we expect you to teach every day and still chaperen your skill set. so, we are saying, absolutely and we are building into this budget, the infrastructure to support the teachers in the classroom, literacy coaches, and intervention coaches and we are building in that infrastructure now that we read

about it somewhere, we can go to here and we can go to everett and brian and we can go to george washington carver and see this in effect. and we can go to paul reviere and see how this is used in the school communities to great effect and to interrupt the under performance of the students and so that is what you are going to see and some people will call it ntss. but we just call it what has worked in san francisco, and that has been the lens what i do appreciate about what the deputy superintendent lee in his last slide articulated is that we are just scratching the surface. we have a 7-period day discussion that is incredibly important for the conversation around equity for the students and we have avoid the conversations about how do we put more money into and we have balanced score card conversations about how do we

direct and give the guidance to the school communities as they are developing the action plans and how are they going to hold themselves and the district accountable for the support that they need to move the needle. so you are going to... the public will have ample opportunity and the board will drive this conversation in the coming months around how we use the resources that come back to us and how do we use them in a systematic systemic and very thoughtful way to build capacity to interrupt decades, decades of under achievement in our community, which is what the board has articulated is our board. >> deputy superintendent do you want to go in the cracks that i missed? >> thank you, superintendent, you said what i was going to say and a whole lot more. but just to highlight one theme, which is to mention, i think that one of the main things that we need to both in

the district's relationships with the schools and then within schools, and how they are surveying all of the diverse students within each school community, and do a thoughtful and a effective job of providing a base. there are parallel and it looks different between the districts and the school verses the schools in schools but the same principals as to why and with respect to why all or the base or the roll out and the implementation of the common core is probably one of the most significant examples of things that are happening nationwide and state wide and within our district.

and so investing thoughtfully in the common core, and implementation and that is critical. and that is embedded throughout the budget development process. and then, also, the ntss which the superintendent mentioned from the district to the school sites and so providing, an effective base of support to all schools and then differentiation for the schools that are identified as needing additional more focused support. and then within the schools, implementing the strategies like response to intervention or more specific use of the early warning indicators, and the case management and providing the resources to do that. the synergy implementation is going to be another important tool in that regard. so as i think that all of the commissioners are aware that we have significant limitations

and frankly risks with our current information system and we know that is a big ticket item in terms of cost and we are confident that that will and that investment will be worth it. in the short run and the long run from the program perspective and to recognize the data risks and the challenges with the limitations in the current system. you are asking a big question, commissioner there are a lot of different things that are embedded and i will point to the guiding principle and emphasizing equity and our priorities which the superintendent referenced. >> did you get your question answered there haney. >> commissioner wynns? >> thank you. >> i want to thank you for the presentation this evening because i appreciate the new

information and i have not seen before and i want to thank you for the answers to the questions and i want to thank you for all of them, although i do not think that they were adequately answered that could be and appreciate in particular that recognition that we have big pending questions that will help us to understand more how we budget the money, and how reeducating us. and so i appreciate that. and there are a couple of things that will delve me out. here is the... in part the answer to not exactly the question that he asked and i would like to say that everybody wants to know and where is the money going the more money that we have, and i

totally appreciate completely that it is not anything like what the people are presuming that we have and so you know if you look in the newspapers it says with the implementation, the san francisco unified is going to go from $7,000 per student which is all funds and not just our revenue of a limit to $11,000. it does not say in the next eight years and that is important for people to know. yet, as commissioner haney said if you look at our revenue you see that we have more next year than we do this year. it is very hard the way that these things are organized basically into the object codes and ftes and things like that for the people to really understand. and so, my, or when the people have asked me, i have said well where they are going to if you look at this chart, we don't have to make the cuts that we thought that we might have to make. and also, so there is not any place that says this is whatnot having any furlough days next year is going to cost us of

that additional revenue. this is what i don't know what these numbers mean but i appreciate the list here of things that say that we have changes from this year to next year to the following year in >> the cost of the increases

and i am hoping that you can make, and summarize and i don't know if it is possible, it summarize some of this information for us here now, so that we everybody will understand, we will understand as i think we do when we look at the budget book but we have to look at it in such detail there about what we are actually voting on and what the changes are. and is it possible to do that. >> vice president fewer has a question. >> a question to the question. >> and so it seems to me that we look at the budget and the fiscal year for 1213 that we see that the salaries are $168 million for a budget for 13, 14, is $180 million that is where some of monty goes. and also, the 49 million, and 51 millions and we see the estimates and the books and so the benefits. and the fiscal year was 2013,

14, it went up to 91 million. so we are seeing those types of increases. and if you look at the outgo and the classification is and the physical year in 2013 that was 69 million and our fiscal year of 2014 that is 73 million and i think that i look at that estimated to our budget of 13, 14, i could easily see where it might be. >> what i agree is what i think that we should say to people that the reason that salaries have gone up that much is because it includes this much for column and the restoration of the furlough days and that is all of it. the same thing true of the benefit and the class sized salaries and a function of those things so i don't know if we have answered this question but i think that that is kind of more i just think that we

see this much more in the budget, in object codes instead of english. what people can understand. and i would like to see if we could take a step toward there if we think that there is anything that you can say that will help us particularly talking about this. so for instance, some of the questions i referred to that were asked that the budget hearing, are specified here in amounts like how much more are we doing on special ed transportation and those kinds of things. but, the budget book, does not say that. superintendent? >> i will do it. i think that commissioner fewer and wynns did an admirable job of answering that question. >> what do they use that for? >> well, i think that is a good point in that there are some ongoing costs that as a matter of doing business, step and column increases and the cost

of reducing furloughs and the deputy superintendent lee talked about the increase in the skyrocketing cost of benefits and those are costs that just it sounds almost unwheming to say, it is just a cost of doing business, period as an entity. so those costs are embedded in the costs that you will see embedded in the budget but i do think that it is probably a good idea to take the page that you have referred to commissioner wynns and have lee just very briefly make some points about some of the items that are listed there because they also illustrate in the budget book. >> i just want to say that the pages that were just referring to and because of their sort of

technical nature and i will elaborate on this in a moment. >> basically this information was in order to respond to a couple of requests that commissioners had made to the differences from the previous projections and say back in january and the projections that are reflected in the recommended budget and not necessarily looking at 1213, verses 13, 14, and showing those and that is a dimension and i can comment on that in a moment. but it is more